MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4247940104 · doi:10.24124/2016/17402

Perspectives of the influence of stigma on care-seeking behavior among ethnic Russians living with HIV/AIDS in Ida-Virumaa, Estonia

2017· dissertation· en· W4247940104 on OpenAlexafffund
Tyler A. Wood

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
FundersUniversity of Northern British Columbia
KeywordsStigma (botany)Ethnic groupPsychological interventionHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Health careMedicinePsychologyFamily medicineGerontologyPsychiatryPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since 2001, Estonia has been struggling to contain its explosive HIV epidemic, yet despite years of interventions, adherence to antiretroviral therapy remains between 20% and 40%. The purpose of this research was to examine how HIV stigma is influencing care-seeking behaviour of people living with HIV (PLWHIV) in Ida-Virumaa County, Estonia. This study identified that HIV stigma presents a serious challenge for PLWHIV. The findings not only identified clear cultural metaphors and stigma of HIV and PLWHIV, but also identified that fear of disclosure of status and discrimination from healthcare providers represent significant barriers to care for PLWHIV. The findings also identified that the combination of HIV stigma, fear of disclosure, discrimination from healthcare providers and certain state policies have fostered an environment of structural discrimination that not only limits PLWHIV in Ida-Virumaa ability to access care, but also pushes them away from the healthcare system.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.331 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions→French-language works237,207→